Groton building plan meets with opposition from neighbor

By Pierre Comtois, Correspondent

Updated:
04/12/2013 12:40:19 AM EDT

GROTON -- Uncertain which way to vote on a question involving a disagreement between property owners, one of whom plans to redevelop his land for a medical office building, the Planning Board decided to give the parties a week to see if they can come to some kind of agreement before the board weighs in.

At issue is a plan by local businessman Peter Myette to redevelop 3 acres of his 120 Boston Road property and to construct two new buildings on the site.

As presented to the Planning Board Thursday, the plan calls for the construction of a pair of two-story buildings, one with 8,305 square feet and the other with 2,400 square feet.

The total project will come to 21,410 square feet of floor space.

Next-door neighbor and abutter Dottie Mack's business, Avalon Home Design, is next to Myette's property and shares a septic system and access from Boston Road.

"It's a monstrosity," Mack said. "I'm getting boxed in. They're building right in front of me."

Mack said that the way the proposed buildings are situated in the concept plan, presented to members Thursday, they would overwhelm her small business, blocking her sign from view as well as most of her building.

Mack said a plan to eliminate the septic system and connect to town wastewater services would quadruple her sewer bill, something she can't afford.

"It will affect my business, my livelihood, it will affect everything," said Mack.

Advertisement

What brought the issue to a head was a quirk in the town's zoning regulations involving the property's current status as a business zoned parcel and a 1963 residential/agricultural zoning district part of which still encompasses the property.

Because the square footage of the buildings proposed for the Boston Road site total more than 10,000 square feet, the proposal's concept plan needs to go to a vote before Town Meeting in order to be approved and avoid having to apply for a change in zoning.

According to Myette attorney Robert Anctil, the project is being pressed for time by Pediatrics West, a tenant interested in the site but only if it can be ready by a date certain. For that reason, the developer needs to move as quickly as possible through the review process following any vote of approval at town meeting.

"We have a long way to go on this project," said Anctil, adding that a second prospective tenant for the site was "very interested" in it as well.

Anctil told board members that his client did not need their endorsement but would like to have it going into town meeting.

Myette real estate representative John Amerault said that the site was tailored to fit the needs of the primary tenants including excess footage that would allow for future growth.

"That's what's been driving this process," Amerault said.

But Myette was not the only party involved in the proposal, there was also Mack's interests to consider.

Mack said topographical features of the site including drainage issues that often leave open water on the property that she characterized as an "ice skating rink" in cold weather.

There was also the problem of snow storage in the winter.

"The whole thing needs investigation," said Mack urging board members not to recommend the project. "There's no consideration in this plan for any abutter."

Mack was not unprepared to work with Myette, she said, even offering to sell out to him if the price was right.

Members had concerns including parking, septic, the size of the buildings, snow removal, landscaping, access and drainage.

Board Chairman John Giger stressed communication between the two neighbors, saying bad blood could slow down a review process that turned on speedy approval.

Giger's sentiments were echoed by member Scott Wilson who said he would like to see some kind of informal agreement between the parties while colleague Timothy Svarczkopf questioned the size and location of the proposed buildings.

"I think it will be an uphill battle," said Svarczkopf of the review process.

Members voted to continue the public hearing until their meeting April 18 giving time for the two sides to come to some sort of an agreement before making a decision whether to recommend the project to Town Meeting.

Welcome to your discussion forum: Sign in with a Disqus account or your social networking account for your comment to be posted immediately, provided it meets the guidelines. (READ HOW.)
Comments made here are the sole responsibility of the person posting them; these comments do not reflect the opinion of The Sun. So keep it civil.